Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 84
  1. #46
    Incredible Member Majesty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    882

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueFlight View Post
    The Aunt May/Peter scenes were the highlights of the film, with the Spider-Man sequences coming in second. As much as the first film failed with the Uncle Ben/Peter relationship, it succeeded Aunt May/Peter in the second film and some parts of the first film. THAT relationship felt most true to the source material.
    It is. It's part of the reason I am happy that Garfield will be returning for Amazing Spider-Man 3. There is no two actors and actresses I liked more in those movies than Peter and Aunt May. They are the highlights of the film and deserve to be part of the Marvel cinematic universe. If Sally Fields was always Aunt May and Garfield was Spider-Man then I wouldn't mind any other casting decisions. They also had a fantastic Gwen Stacy(and future Spider-Gwen if they go that route as she looks like Emma Stone anyway). But the cast is perfect.



    I swear if these reshoots have anything to do with a Civil War lead in and introducing Andrew Garfield into the universe in a crossover that would be amazing!

    The only thing they also have to do is bring in J.K. Simmons as JJJ again

    They've been keeping him off-screen for a while, so part of me wonders if that's some sort of surprise in store.


    Anyway, Garfield as Peter/Spider-Man, Fields as Aunt May, JK Simmons and Jameson and Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy.


    And as I said, if the Ending to Age of Ultron is a Civil War nod, and we see Garfield as Peter Parker, the internet will break that day lol.


    When everyone was clamoring for Spider-Man to be in the Avengers most of us had Andrew Garfield in mind.


    Strictly for the fact we NEED that epic scene between him and Robert Downey Jr as Tony Stark.

    You know the scene..


    http://rebloggy.com/post/robert-down...pi/22921930589

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    Actually in TASM 1 he does care for his aunt and uncle. He moarned for his uncle and he was protective for his aunt may. In the deleted scenes he does care for them. In 2 they just shoved Richard down our throats. In the deleted scenes however he is shown to care fir his aunt and the editing in that movie just switched a few scenes around just to make Richard relevant.

    And this is what I talked about earlier when I said if Sony doesn't keep messing with Webb's vision.

    When we see the deleted scenes and scenes in the trailers that look like they have an important aspect on the movie and then they AREN'T in the film it feels like we're missing half the movie.


    Remember, in the first movie there was an entire scene to show Peter's genius when he 'figured' out the formula on a chalkboard and such with Dr. Connors. But in the movie that entire scene is out and he had to settle with doing it in a scene, on a napkin, 'off the dome'.

    Somehow I don't think Webb's getting his full vision in, and I blame SONY as much for that as I do him. But there's obviously something MORE there the movies have wanted to touch on that we never get to see cause they aren't in the final cut.
    Last edited by Majesty; 01-07-2015 at 05:52 PM.

  2. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueFlight View Post
    Sony could salvage the Spider-Man franchise by finding a director who possesses a love and knowledge of Spidey and a vision for the character. They found that in Raimi, who captured Peter's earnestness, decency, and dorkiness. And what Raimi did so well is allow the characters to be interesting and well-rounded. Raimi's first two films, despite the lack of Spidey banter, felt like Spidey and his world. There was a sweetness to those first two Raimi films, and Peter is essentially a sweet guy. Yeah, tragic things happen to him, but he is not defined by those tragedies. He was raised by two wonderful people who gave him a strong sense of optimism. These last two films - the first one more so - feel so cynical and sometimes cold. In the first Webb film Peter is aloof and seems to regard Uncle Ben with contempt, which is totally wrong because Peter should regard Uncle Ben as a father and love and look up to him as such. So Sony's top priority needs to be getting Peter right again as well as the tone and feeling of Peter's world. Of course, it would be best if they simply relinquished creative control to Marvel Studios.
    I don't think the problem was the Director. Sony made demands for the narrative that placed a ceiling on how good the film could be. The requirement of setting up a Sinister Six film meant the film needed multiple villains which meant it was going to be a narrative mess with everything else going on. Webb also had to hit deadlines, which gave less flexibility in fixing structural problems (The core one being the poor match of two villains who require a lot of set-up.)

  3. #48
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperiorIronman View Post
    Amazing 2 just did to much wrong and makes it difficult to put in the Mcu. They do have a pretty tight continuity and this would makes things a bit weird. It's definitely not impossible but certain things would have to be left out and I'm sure Sony doesn't want that.

    I personally would want spider-man's world expanded upon with what I've mentioned as 2099. Giving hints there is a Peter Parker but isn't seen but we know he exists and can acknowledge whatever Sony is doing without interfering with either continuity.
    I really don't see the problem here since comics abd shows have their own self contained stories. Worrying about continuity in the film universe isn't much of a problem. Who the heck cares about spiderman in the chitari invasion. Don't they have other superpowered characters. I really don't need an explanation. Just show us Garfiekd in rights fighting criminals while hanong his daily routines.

  4. #49
    Rookie Member KatieKaBoom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    37

    Default

    I'm actually excited to see someone new as Spider-Man. I prefer Andrew Garfield to Tobey Maguire, but I'm not particularly fond of either of them.
    Last edited by KatieKaBoom; 04-15-2015 at 07:43 AM.
    “You don't know what it's like to live in different worlds, to travel on great adventures through the galaxy with people you know better than you know your own family. To live and die with them.”

  5. #50
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    If its that Asa butterscotch kid they lost me. The kid is a great actir but that is my concern. He looks 13-14 rather than a 16 year old. I know there are other teens that look like that but I want an ACTUAL teenage looking Parker rather than a little boy.

  6. #51
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    996

    Default

    Spider-Man changes from the status quo every movie, I think his whole issue is not being a composite of differents aspect of Spider-Man that are celebrated and promoted, just create a Spider-Man that touches in all sides of the characters history's to Stan/Dickto to Romitia to JMS to Bendis to Slott and put them all in a blender. Sorta like Brave and Bold did with Batman.

  7. #52
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimishim12 View Post
    Spider-Man changes from the status quo every movie, I think his whole issue is not being a composite of differents aspect of Spider-Man that are celebrated and promoted, just create a Spider-Man that touches in all sides of the characters history's to Stan/Dickto to Romitia to JMS to Bendis to Slott and put them all in a blender. Sorta like Brave and Bold did with Batman.
    i believe that best works for a tv show which ultimate spiderman was but like the last episode of brave and the bold showed us it was a toy commercial with slap stick humor come to life.

  8. #53
    Post Editing OCD Confuzzled's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Swingin' Above Ya
    Posts
    9,505

    Default

    I am. I would have loved to see him swoon for Cap and exchange spunky banter with Tony.

  9. #54
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Confuzzled View Post
    I am. I would have loved to see him swoon for Cap and exchange spunky banter with Tony.
    same. i feel that Andrew Garfield would also have a connection with Cap and Tony

  10. #55
    Ultimate Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,829

    Default

    I liked Garfield in the role, I think he was natural, fun, and hit a nice balance of being a "social nobody" without going all the way into "social pariah" territory. I didnt care for a lot of the direction and script in the ASM films, but Garfield wasn't the problem, in fact he was the major reason I enjoyed the movies as much as I did. I still think they're decent enough films despite their flaws, but then again, Im not a hard core Spidey fan to begin with, so there's a lot of wiggle room for me. They're better than Spider-Man 3 if nothing else.

    I dont want to see the world of the ASM films brought into the MCU though; the things that worked will carry over in one form or another anyway, but there's an awful lot there I'd rather not see included.

    If Im being totally honest, I was hoping for Morales. I think it would have got a ton of press, and any negativity over Spider-Man not being Parker would have been countered by the diversity acclaim. It also would have been a very clear indication that the new Spider-Man is a different animal from what has come before, and aside from the first two MaGuire films, they haven't been that well received, so that'd be a big bonus. Plus, it'd be a new twist on the character worth exploring and all the things that make Parker work are still there with Morales.

    But Marvel is using Parker, like we all knew they would. Which, whatever, that's fine. I hope they do right by the character, thats all that matters. I just hope they dont race swap him. Im normally fine with that sort of thing, but if you use a black or Hispanic Parker....well, there's a perfectly viable minority character already established with Morales.
    Higher, Faster, Further....More.

    Truth, Justice, and a Better Tomorrow!

    Bridge Four!

  11. #56
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    i really do not know why people want Miles so badly? he's a pretty good character but there are decades of source materials you can find in spider-man. miles had appeared since like what? 2010? that's 5 years. whenever you thought miles or making peter black is a good idea i really question you people.

    i very much prefer to see Garfield and Peter again in red and blue spandex.

  12. #57
    Extraordinary Member DebkoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Global
    Posts
    6,653

    Default

    Nope. Sorry but I disliked the recent series with a passion.
    That is the land of lost content, I see it shining plain, the happy highways where I went and cannot come again.

  13. #58
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    i really do not know why people want Miles so badly? he's a pretty good character but there are decades of source materials you can find in spider-man. miles had appeared since like what? 2010? that's 5 years. whenever you thought miles or making peter black is a good idea i really question you people.

    i very much prefer to see Garfield and Peter again in red and blue spandex.
    Miles has managed to become one of the more recognizable Spider-Men who aren't Peter. Given how many white guys are in the MCU, having someone like Miles or changing Peter's race would add some diversity there.

  14. #59
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phantom Roxas View Post
    Miles has managed to become one of the more recognizable Spider-Men who aren't Peter. Given how many white guys are in the MCU, having someone like Miles or changing Peter's race would add some diversity there.
    But having miles take his life and history is just a dumb move to make. There are decades of source materials you can use. So people are more bothered by British actors playing Peter but aren't bothered by a black actor. I will say that I am impressed that the people here aren't acting racist towards it. However I will say its pointless and stupid and even ignorant to be bashing on a British actor even one who is white to play an American character. What the hell was the deal here?

  15. #60
    Ultimate Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,829

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    i really do not know why people want Miles so badly? he's a pretty good character but there are decades of source materials you can find in spider-man. miles had appeared since like what? 2010? that's 5 years. whenever you thought miles or making peter black is a good idea i really question you people.

    i very much prefer to see Garfield and Peter again in red and blue spandex.
    Well, as I said, Im not a hard core Spidey fan. And with the MCU, I think that there are tones and themes you could use with Miles that don't quite fit Parker.

    First off, yes, there's the diversity thing. It matters. Let's just get that out of the way and we can all acknowledge that whether you agree with it or not, the vast majority support it. So it matters simply because most people believe it matters.

    Then there's the age thing. We have a lot of twenty-to-thirty-somethings running around in tights. Younger (or older) characters? Not so much. So having a teenager in the MCU offers a completely different path to explore. Teenagers are, generally, just a mess. They haven't self-actualized the same way adults have. So you get new storytelling options with a teenager, and the comics version of Parker is closer to thirty than he is to sixteen. And I always prefer to see the films reflect the source as accurately as is reasonable. Given that Parker hasn't been in high school since before most movie-goers were born, I dont feel a teen Parker accurately reflects the source.

    There's also the concept of legacy. That's something the movies have not really tackled. We'll be getting some of that in Ant-Man I believe, and it could be argued that Agent Carter is about legacy, but it's still a rare theme in the MCU. You could tackle that with Miles, and as it's unlikely that Scott Lang is going to become Ant-Man to honor Pym, Miles provides a very different view on the concept.

    As for the short time that Miles has existed, that's really a non-issue. Assuming that a movie tells one adapted comic book story line and a film comes out every three years, and assuming the average storyline runs six issues, that means we have enough material for ten movies spread across thirty years. Even if you decide that only one out of every four storylines is worth turning into a movie, that still means that there's enough material to last about seven years. At that rate, you're still producing one "movie-worthy" story every two years, while the movies only come out every three. And of course, there's nothing saying that a movie has to follow a comic story at all.
    Higher, Faster, Further....More.

    Truth, Justice, and a Better Tomorrow!

    Bridge Four!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •